|
|
| Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) (1151011) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (1151681) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Apr 18 15:11:10 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by MainR3664 on Wed Apr 18 08:29:46 2012. Bookmarked that site long ago. It's a godsend for railbuffs who want to see what things used to be like. Last week I was looking in the area of Somerville, NJ because I wanted to see where the old Flemington branch diverged from the CNJ main and was shocked to see how big and busy this junction was as late as 1960. |
|
|
| (1151682) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Apr 18 15:16:07 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by randyo on Tue Apr 17 18:01:10 2012. I'm not so sure about that. Before WWII there was no specific plan to keep the heavier Queens segment of the Fulton el and the subway tunnel was already dig to the Queens border. If events (war) and money had not caused a rethinking of the original plan to extend the subway down Pitkin Ave, the whole elevated structure east of Atlantic Ave would have been demolished.However, had the Pennsylvania Ave/Grant Ave segment been rebuilt the entire line may have remained as a branch of the Nassau St or Canarsie lines, since it would have needed no modernization and no special, lightweight cars. |
|
|
| (1151683) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Apr 18 15:19:03 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 16 14:52:56 2012. If they could lay up R-10's on that track, it must of had dual third rail for el/subway, right? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1151689) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Apr 18 15:39:06 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by Elkeeper on Wed Apr 18 15:19:03 2012. BMT lines used one third rail for both types. That track was to dual contracts standard, like the tracks on the Upper Myrtle or the Culver, which both saw significant useage by el cars. |
|
|
| (1151692) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Apr 18 15:45:46 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by Fulton Frank on Tue Apr 17 22:28:22 2012. The current subway is, but JoeV suggested that it only be 2 tracks with a rebuilt Fulton St El structure above. Under that scenario, it would have been an unnecessary expense since the cost difference between a 2 track vs a 4 track subway would be minimal and would be in addition to upgrading the structure. |
|
|
| (1151694) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Apr 18 15:48:46 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by 3-9 on Wed Apr 18 00:46:27 2012. If the subway had been able to be connected to an improved Fulton El structure, it probably would have been similar to the connection to the Culver at Ditmas which has a 4 track ramp merging into 3 tracks so a continued 4 track Fulton el would not have been necessary. |
|
|
| (1151697) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Apr 18 15:58:40 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Apr 18 15:16:07 2012. If you have read my posts and seen the track diagrams of the Pitkin Subway, as soon as unification took place, subway construction commenced down Pitkin Av with both a subway all the way down Pitkin and a connection to the Liberty Av portion of the Fulton el to coexist. Liberty Jct was not in the original plans and a contract book I have seen which contains the ramp connection from the subway to the el clearly states that existing BMT signaling was to be used past the Hudson St interlocking. The Pitkin Av subway was to have continued past the oft mentioned 76 St station to a point in the vicinity of Aqueduct Race Track where it would have been connected via a portal to the LIRR ROW the plans for which were long under way prior to unification. THose plans were still in place in 1948, but by 1951, they were changed so that the subway would not continue down Pitkin but instead the connection to the LIRR ROW would be made at what we now know as Liberty Jct. Interestingly enough, a 1051 B of T report I have indicates that along with the present connection to the Rockaways from Fulton, the original; connection at 63 Dr to the LIRR ROW was also to be completed. |
|
|
| (1151702) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Apr 18 16:25:34 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by randyo on Wed Apr 18 15:58:40 2012. I've seen plans which had the Rockaway line connected to both the Fulton St and Queens Blvd lines. IIRC, the original IND expansion plans contained both connections. Probably due to demand, as the LIRR was also intended to be extended south from Rockaway Park to B149th St. |
|
|
| (1151724) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Wed Apr 18 18:13:59 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by tunnelrat on Wed Apr 18 13:12:22 2012. ok |
|
|
| (1151812) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Apr 19 00:19:56 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by tunnelrat on Wed Apr 18 13:12:22 2012. Odd, the aerial view of 1924 didn't show anything at all, just lots and some buildings around them. |
|
|
| (1151830) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 19 06:33:40 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by 3-9 on Wed Apr 18 00:46:27 2012. If they had used the rebuilt portion of the Fulton el (which was a large chunk), they would have needed to build the subway below. |
|
|
| (1151831) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 19 06:35:51 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Apr 18 15:16:07 2012. Another shame is that they rebuilt the segment between Pennsylvania ave (just past Franklin) to Atlantic ave, instead of the part further out between Bway Junction and Grant instead. It may still be here today if they did that part first. |
|
|
| (1151908) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Apr 19 14:04:30 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Apr 19 06:35:51 2012. If they had done that, I think the subway portion of the line would have been cut back to ENY and the el connected there. ENY would probably have been made the terminal for the IND locals. |
|
|
| (1151933) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by seabeachexpress on Thu Apr 19 15:30:11 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 16 14:52:56 2012. So I guess the rebuilt sections were built to last over 100 years but only saw 40 years of use. |
|
|
| (1151965) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Thu Apr 19 17:53:28 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by randyo on Wed Apr 18 15:48:46 2012. But with that bottleneck, it means another reason why all 4 tunnel tracks can't be utilized to their full potential. They could make Rockaway Ave a terminal for the local like Euclid or Church, but then it would be short of connecting to a transfer point, like Bway Junction or Atlantic. So in the end, the modified Fulton route would only be able to take one (maybe 2 if they squeeze) extra services from east of Rockaway Ave, not much better than before. |
|
|
| (1151982) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Apr 19 18:49:19 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by 3-9 on Thu Apr 19 17:53:28 2012. About the only thing the city could have done if that had been the case would have been to add an additional track onto the existing Fulton el structure near Bway jct and along with it construct a 4 track elevated express station for terminating local trains there. It would have been complicated but not impossible. |
|
|
| (1151983) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Thu Apr 19 18:49:35 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by 3-9 on Thu Apr 19 17:53:28 2012. About the only thing the city could have done if that had been the case would have been to add an additional track onto the existing Fulton el structure near Bway jct and along with it construct a 4 track elevated express station for terminating local trains there. It would have been complicated but not impossible. |
|
|
| (1152842) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by GIS Man on Tue Apr 24 10:12:11 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Apr 16 12:43:48 2012. In general it appears that, the older the line, the closer together are the stations. The 2nd Av. El had stations at 111, 117. 121 and 125, while the 9th Av. El had stations at 135, 140, 145, 150 and 155.Bob |
|
|
| (1152843) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by GIS Man on Tue Apr 24 10:19:05 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by randyo on Wed Apr 18 15:58:40 2012. Was the Pitkin Av. subway intended to continue down Pitkin Av. all the way to the LIRR ROW, or was it intended to run under Linden Blvd. part of the way? This might account for the uncompleted Linden Blvd. ROW between 88th St. and Cross Bay Blvd.Bob |
|
|
| (1152845) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by William A. Padron on Tue Apr 24 10:29:10 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by GIS Man on Tue Apr 24 10:19:05 2012. Initial plans with stations proposed had the line going along Pitkin Avenue to a four-track Cross Bay Boulevard local/express station in the same set-up like 168th Street-Broadway in Manhattan. It would then go to a two-track stub station at 105th Street, but there would have been a provision east of the Cross Bay Boulevard station for layup storage and a separate connection to the LIRR Rockaway line ROW just north of the Aqueduct-North Conduit Avenue station.-William A. Padron ["Fulton-Cross Bay"???] |
|
|
| (1152857) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by Mark S. Feinman on Tue Apr 24 13:23:25 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by GIS Man on Tue Apr 24 10:12:11 2012. My guess for this: the trains acted like buses as well with stops closer together since there weren't buses early on.--Mark |
|
|
| (1152892) | |
Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Apr 24 17:44:28 2012, in response to Re: R-10's At Hinsdale Street - BMT Fulton (4/15/1956), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Apr 19 14:04:30 2012. Yes, I agree. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
